waiting until the turn paradox, simple HEFAP question

[man]

some people have been saying that this book is written for games where people know when to fold, and so the advice given does not apply to this situation. I highly recommend that these people actually read the section in question before commenting. on p. 159 the game is described as "a loose, passive game where many people see the flop and then play poorly after that." last time I checked, this is exactly what most small-stakes tables are like. so, the concept is completely applicable in these games.

here's a quote that sums up what they're getting at:

[ QUOTE ]
Even if you have a good hand, you should be a little less apt to raise than if you were against better players. This is not only because the the hand doesn't play well against many people, but for a second reason: With a hand that plays pretty good but not great, if you don't raise and thereby cost yourself a little bit of money at that point, you gain it back plus some because had you made the pot bigger there would be less opportunity for your opponents to make significant mistakes later on. (159)

[/ QUOTE ]

reading this section in HEFAP made me go nuts for like a week. everything I'd understood about flop play was turned upside down. I recommend only using this play where it's absolutely clear that the conditions are perfect.

[kamelion44]

Yeah I understand that play, and why it makes you more money, but what I'm referring to a different sort of play, not the one where you're catching a guy in between you. I don't have the book in front of me, but there's an example of a KK hand, which is more similar to the situation I'm referring to. I'll get back to this post when I get the book back tomorrow.